But his early 0 for 4 or 5 absolutely stopped our momentum. I think we were down 18-16 after being up 14-6. It took us the whole game to regain the momentum. At some point, a player has to hit shots.

Click to expand...

The play by play of the stretch I think you are talking about (from 14-6 Pistons to 18-16 Twolves), off of ESPN. I read it as suggesting that our loss of momentum in that stretch is a bit more complicated than AI's "early 0 for 4 or 5".

Prof.: The Pistons didn't get many shots in that stretch and AI missed two of them and blocked once--three missed possessions. He went on to miss 2 or 3 more before getting a bucket. Everyone else in that starting unit was playing well. Thank you for talking about the game instead of how great AI is in the abstract or in his career or how he is the best player. I am focused on his play as a Piston. I think we should have blown out Minn. and I still think we are struggling to integrate AI. Rip is not like Ginobli in that he can't stay on the court too long because that will lead to small ball.

Here is the deal. Why can't AI be benched for not playing well? Rip got about half the minutes of AI. AI complained in the press the other day. Is that why? I am not anti-AI and I was open to the trade. I like the guy. But I am beginning to wonder what he adds to the Pistons. As I said, the next two games should tell us something. I hope he does do some game changing things out on the court against the Cavs and celts. He did do some nice things in the 4th quarter but he played to many minutes up until then for his level of contribution. The points at the end of the game made him plus 3 for the game as I look at the box score.

Prof.: The Pistons didn't get many shots in that stretch and AI missed two of them and blocked once--three missed possessions. He went on to miss 2 or 3 more before getting a bucket.

Click to expand...

Actually, he missed one more before getting his first bucket, the tip/put-back on Rip's fast break miss. Then he got a lay-up blocked. And then he made a jumper. That was it for the first quarter. At the beginning of the second, he missed a lay-up and then made two free-throws before his stint ended.

Here is the deal. Why can't AI be benched for not playing well? Rip got about half the minutes of AI. AI complained in the press the other day. Is that why? I am not anti-AI and I was open to the trade. I like the guy. But I am beginning to wonder what he adds to the Pistons.

Click to expand...

These seem like reasonable questions, though I'm not sure that I'd approach them in terms of AI minutes vs. Rip minutes (I think that's a distracting, false problem, but that's probably for another thread). Tonight was the first night that I saw AI, as a piston, doing to Minnesota what he used to do to us in the playoffs, get into the lane at will. I admit, I wish that he was able to finish more of those buckets near the rim. But if we are talking about a process of integration, then I'll take the fact that he got to the line and he made a few. In other words, what AI should contribute to the Pistons, IMO, is points in the paint, points from the line, and then some assists, and some easy put backs for our bigs off his drives.

Prof.: The Pistons didn't get many shots in that stretch and AI missed two of them and blocked once--three missed possessions. He went on to miss 2 or 3 more before getting a bucket. Everyone else in that starting unit was playing well. Thank you for talking about the game instead of how great AI is in the abstract or in his career or how he is the best player. I am focused on his play as a Piston. I think we should have blown out Minn. and I still think we are struggling to integrate AI. Rip is not like Ginobli in that he can't stay on the court too long because that will lead to small ball.

Here is the deal. Why can't AI be benched for not playing well? Rip got about half the minutes of AI. AI complained in the press the other day. Is that why? I am not anti-AI and I was open to the trade. I like the guy. But I am beginning to wonder what he adds to the Pistons. As I said, the next two games should tell us something. I hope he does do some game changing things out on the court against the Cavs and celts. He did do some nice things in the 4th quarter but he played to many minutes up until then for his level of contribution. The points at the end of the game made him plus 3 for the game as I look at the box score.

Click to expand...

This is a really articulate post. Gets the point across perfectly. These next two games should give us an indication of what we can expect.

Rip saved this game for us. His spark off the bench turned this game around. When he came in the game the Wolves were shooting free throws. He gathered all his teammates together and said something to them in that little huddle. Not sure what he said but it seemed to light a fire under the guys on the floor.

That is the first time I remember him being a vocal leader on the floor. Is he seeing things from the bench that he wouldn't normally pick up while on the floor. I think he needed more minutes in the second half of this one but a win is a win.

He will be well rested for tomorrow and will probably see more minutes due to Boston's size advantage.

Sheed started out what 4-5 or so in the first quarter and got what, 3 shots in the 2nd and 3rd quarters? Let's contrast that with the regularity that MN went to Jefferson on offense. Which do you think helps build consistency?

Sheed's shaky play is troubling though. He's their oldest player and all they're asking him to do is guard the toughest big one on one with no help and protect the paint at the same time as well as being their only viable 3 point shooter and post player on offense. People think he should get the vets minimum?

Max = invisible Amir = invisible

MN, as the papers pointed out today, played into DET's hands by not running P & R on them. BOS?

Prof.: The Pistons didn't get many shots in that stretch and AI missed two of them and blocked once--three missed possessions. He went on to miss 2 or 3 more before getting a bucket. Everyone else in that starting unit was playing well. Thank you for talking about the game instead of how great AI is in the abstract or in his career or how he is the best player. I am focused on his play as a Piston. I think we should have blown out Minn. and I still think we are struggling to integrate AI. Rip is not like Ginobli in that he can't stay on the court too long because that will lead to small ball.

Here is the deal. Why can't AI be benched for not playing well? Rip got about half the minutes of AI. AI complained in the press the other day. Is that why? I am not anti-AI and I was open to the trade. I like the guy. But I am beginning to wonder what he adds to the Pistons. As I said, the next two games should tell us something. I hope he does do some game changing things out on the court against the Cavs and celts. He did do some nice things in the 4th quarter but he played to many minutes up until then for his level of contribution. The points at the end of the game made him plus 3 for the game as I look at the box score.

Click to expand...

So you would have benched AI early in the game? And not gotten his 19 points, and not gotten their team into some foul trouble?

Sheed started out what 4-5 or so in the first quarter and got what, 3 shots in the 2nd and 3rd quarters? Let's contrast that with the regularity that MN went to Jefferson on offense. Which do you think helps build consistency?

Sheed's shaky play is troubling though. He's their oldest player and all they're asking him to do is guard the toughest big one on one with no help and protect the paint at the same time as well as being their only viable 3 point shooter and post player on offense. People think he should get the vets minimum?

Max = invisible Amir = invisible

MN, as the papers pointed out today, played into DET's hands by not running P & R on them. BOS?

Click to expand...

Agree with you that they should have gone to Sheed as many times as possible until they were able to stop him. He could have a had a breakout game.

I do not agree with Amir being invisible. It is amazing how quick he is in the post. It seems like he is constantly beating his opponent to the spot he is trying to get to. If he would just quit reaching he could be more effective. He had a couple of good blocks that were a deterrent to the opposition driving the lane. When he was taken out is when we started getting beaten up. He needs to be getting a few minutes in the fourth quarter. Seems like Curry forgets about the rest of our bigs once Sheed and Dice are on the floor together (whether they are playing well or not).

MN, as the papers pointed out today, played into DET's hands by not running P & R on them. BOS?

Click to expand...

So, is that a good invisible or a bad invisible? If the other team changes their strategy and chooses to isolate Jefferson on Sheed (one of our best defenders) in the post vs. running P & R's at Amir/Maxiell, that may explain some of the mysterious effectiveness.

So, is that a good invisible or a bad invisible? If the other team changes their strategy and chooses to isolate Jefferson on Sheed (one of our best defenders) in the post vs. running P & R's at Amir/Maxiell, that may explain some of the mysterious effectiveness.

Click to expand...

Adjustments are made at halftime. Since Detroit started the game playing Amir, and then had Maxiell play quite a bit after that, the pick and roll was not an option. Guaranteed, if we were not playing Amir and JMAX much, the other team would have 1)prescouted us in the first place, and pick and rolled us to death 2) At halftime, fine tune the pick and rolls, and then kick around our carcass.

So, is that a good invisible or a bad invisible? If the other team changes their strategy and chooses to isolate Jefferson on Sheed (one of our best defenders) in the post vs. running P & R's at Amir/Maxiell, that may explain some of the mysterious effectiveness.

Click to expand...

2 seperate points? They were invisible as in bad.

Then, DET struggled to beat MN when they don't run an offense that exploits DET's biggest weakness. I didn't even realize this when I wrote it. Gulp!

Our SB stints were reduced to only 10:09 against Minny. In that time, it was -3 vs. +12 for BB in 37:51.

Our big ball lineup was getting abused by Jefferson, yet it still worked out better for us.

On top of all this, we still held Minnesota to 89 points in their arena where they have averaged 111 points per game in their last 5 and 105 points per game in their last 10.

So, if Amir and Max were invisible because Minnesota wasn't attacking them, then that is a great outcome for us. If Sheed would have had a little more success on Jefferson, then it would have been a real lock-down performance by Det.